DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Office of Communi ty Services

Community Services Block Grant

District ofColumbia State Assessment

On-Site Review

FINAL

(March 23 - 27, 2015)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................... . .......................................... . ... ............ Background ................................................................ .. ................. .. ............. ...... .

State Assessment Authority ........................................................... . ....... . .......... ... .... ... .

Scope ofReview ........................ ........................................... ............... ................................ ...... .. ........ .

Methodology......................................................................................................... 2

Il. STATE ASSESSMENT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .. ................ . . ..... ....... .... 3

III. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE ASSESSMENT .............. . ... . .... .. ... ... .... . ..... .... ... ... 5 Administrative Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Designation ofLead Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Public and Legislative Hearings... .. ..... ....... ...... ..... .... ......... ...... .......... ............... ....... 5

State Application and Plan...................................................................................... 5

Community Action Plan and Community Needs Assessment............................................. 5

Administrative and Discretionary Use of Funds................................ ............................. 6

Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Training and Technical Assistance............................................................................ 7

Corrective Action, Termination and Reduction ofFunding......................... . .... . ..... . ........... 7

Financial Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Fiscal Controls and Audits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Recapture and Redistribution ofUnobligated Funds............................. . .......................... 8

State Carryover Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Federal Financial Report . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9

Program Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Tripartite Boards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 0

ROMA and Annual Reporting ............................. ... ........... .. . . ....... . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0

Use of Ninety Percent of Funds....................................... . ........................................ 9

Annual Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Limitation on Use of Funds........................................ . ....... ..... .............. .... .... . . ........ 11

Child Support Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ............... 11

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

IV. APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13 At-A-Glance: Eligible Entities Site Visits............................ . ... . ..................................... 14

Report Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15

District of Columbia Community Services Block Grant

I. Executive Summary

Background

The Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) provides assistance to States and local communities working through a network of Community Action Agencies (CAAs) and other neighborhood-based organizations for the reduction ofpoverty, the revitalization oflow-income communities, and the empowerment oflow-income families and individuals to become fully self-sufficient. CSBG­funded activities create, coordinate, and deliver a broad array of services to low-income Americans. The grant's purpose is to fund initiatives to change conditions that perpetuate poverty, especially unemployment, inadequate housing, poor nutrition, and lack of educational opportunity.

The Mayor of the District ofColumbia designated the Department of Human Services (DHS) as the appropriate lead agency for the administration of CSBG. The District of Columbia CSBG provides funding, technical assistance, and support to one eligible entity that serves 8 wards. The eligible entity provides an array of services according to their Community Action Plan formulated to address local needs. Services may include housing, energy assistance, nutrition, employment and training as well as transportation, family development, child care, health care, emergency food and shelter, domestic violence prevention services, money management, and micro-business development.

The information contained in this report was compiled during a State Assessment (SA) of the District of Columbia's CSBG and its eligible entity as evaluated by Federal staff from the Division ofCommunity Assistance (DCA) in the Office ofCommunity Services (OCS), an office within the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department ofHealth and Human Services (HHS).

State Assessment Authority

SAs are conducted to examine the implementation, performance, compliance, and outcomes of a State's CSBG and to certify that the State is adhering to the provisions set forth in Title II ­Community Services, of the Coats Human Services Reauthorization Act, Public Law 105-285. As per the CSBG statute, the SA examines the States and its eligible entities assurances of program, fiscal and governance operations, as well as the States oversight procedures for its eligible entities.

Scope of Review

OCS Federal staff conducted the on-site review of the District of Columbia CSBG and its eligible entity from March 23-27,2015. The periods reviewed included FY 2013 through FY 2014.

- 1 ­

Methodology

OCS reviewed documented procedures and practices for administrative, fiscal , and program, operations, and interviewed District of Columbia officials responsible for administering the CSBG.

OCS reviewers:

• Evaluated compliance ofDistrict-level assurances, administrative, fiscal, program, and governance requirements.

• Evaluated the District' s monitoring procedures and practices to determine the eligible entities compliance with the District-level assurances.

- 2 ­

II. State Assessment Findings and Recommendations

During this evaluation, OCS identified a procedural requirement within the District of Columbia that needs strengthening:

Finding One:

Unaccounted for documentation with State and Federal Requirements for CSBG Facilities

Section 678F Grants may not be used by the State or by any other person with which the State makes arrangements .. . for the purchase of improvement of land, or the purchase, construction, or permanent improvement (other than low-cost residential weatherization or other energy-related home repairs) of any building or other facility.

DHS received a waiver February 29, 2000 from the OCS granting permission for use ofCSBG funds to finance construction of a community service center on behalfof their eligible entity. OCS granted the waiver based on extraordinary circumstances sufficient to justify the use of CSBG funds. The total amount ofCSBG funds covered under the waiver was not to exceed $78,725 per fiscal year for 25 years, beginning in fiscal year 2000. The waiver allowed for the use ofCSBG funds to repay the principal and interest, not to exceed $850,000 in construction loans.

OCS requested a copy of the Notice of Federal Interest (NFI) which was required as a condition of the waiver to be filed with the Recorder of Deeds within the District ofColumbia. The NFI secures the Federal interest for the portion ofproperty purchased with Federal funds . During the course of the assessment, it was determined that the NFI was not originally filed with the Recorder of Deeds as required. Subsequent to our fieldwork, the District ofColumbia was able to produce a recently filed NFI dated June 24, 2015.

Recommendation:

1.1. No further action is needed on the filing of an NFI. OCS recommends that DHS routinely review the status of the property to assure that the entity is in compliance with the tenns and conditions of the waiver and via budget reviews affirm the eligible entity is adhering to the annual and term limits on the use ofCSBG.

DHS Response:

Generally and preliminarily, the draft report reflects fairly the accuracy ofobservations, participation and experiences of the District of Columbia CSBG office, its internal agency partners (OCFO) and staff of the CSBG eligible entity. The following is the DC CSBG office's feedback on a couple of items contained in the report:

• The report noted "During the course ofthe assessment, it was determined that the NFI was not originally filed with the Recorder ofDeeds as required. "This conclusive statement did not properly align with the effort and uncontested explanation offered to the review team by the eligible entity's legal official responsible for securing the said document for review during the fieldwork. It is the judgment of the State CSBG office that the integrity of the eligible entity's official is intact.

- 3­

• Page 10 - Limitation on Use ofFunds The parenthetical reference to ':finding number 1 on page 7" is incorrect and is perhaps intended to refer to page 3.

• Page 14 - Report Contributors - DC Staff The correct title for Hayden Bernard is Agency Fiscal Officer The correct title for Tunde Eboda is State CSBG Administrator (Also , please note/reflect correct title on Cover Letter.)

OCS Response:

OCS revised the final report to include DHS comments on page 10 and page 14. As stated in the finding, no further action is needed on the filing of the NFI. However, recommendation 1.1 remains open pending a DHS response briefly describing how it will routinely review the status of the property to assure compliance with the terms and conditions of the waiver and affirm via budget reviews that the eligible entity is adhering to the annual and term limits on the use of CSBG.

-4­

III. District of Columbia State Assessment

ADMINISTRATIVE OPERATIONS

Designation of Lead Agency

Section 676(a) of the CSBG statute requires each State to designate a lead agency to administer CSBG. The lead agency shall develop the state plan, hold public and legislative hearings and, provide oversight of the eligible entities.

The Mayor of the District ofColumbia designated the Department of Human Services (DHS), as the lead agency to administer CSBG.

Public and Legislative Hearings

Section 676(a)(2)(B) requires a public hearing with, among other provisions, sufficient time for public comment, and Section 676(a)(3) states that in order to be eligible to receive a grant or allotment the State shall hold at least one legislative hearing every 3 years in conjunction with the state plan.

Documentation provided by the DHS showed that notification of the hearings was published on June 22, 2012. DHS made copies of the FY 2013 to FY 2014 state plan available to the general public for inspection, review and comment from July 2, 2012. OCS noted that a public hearing was held on July 20, 2012.

State Application and Plan

Section 676(a)(2)(A) and Section 676(b)(1-13) requires the lead agency develop the state plan to be submitted to the Secretary. The plan shall be submitted not later than 30 days prior to the beginning of the first fiscal year covered by the plan, and contain assurances that funds made available through the grant will be used for the reduction of poverty, revitalization oflow income communities, and empowerment of low-income families to become fully self-sufficient.

On behalf of the District ofColumbia, DHS submitted to OCS the FY 2013 - FY 2014 state plan on August 23, 2012 in accordance with the CSBG Act. OCS accepted the state plan on September 4, 2012. The state plan contained programmatic, administrative, and financial assurances that funds made available through the grant will be used to address the needs of low income communities, and empower low-income families to become fully self-sufficient.

Community Action Plan and Community Needs Assessment

Section 676(11) requires State to secure from each eligible entity in the State, a Community Action Plan that includes a Community Needs Assessment for the community served, which may be coordinated with community needs assessments conducted for other programs.

DHS requires their eligible entity to include the Community Needs Assessment (CNA) when they submit their Community Action Plan. The eligible entity completes a comprehensive community needs assessment every three years and is makes updates annually.

- 5 ­

OCS found that DHS had established procedures and practices to help assure that the eligible entity accurately assessed the needs of the community and its residents.

Administrative and Discretionary Use of Funds

Section 675C(2) Administrative Cap- No State may spend more than the greater of$55,000, or 5 percent, of the grant for administrative activities, including monitoring activities. Funds to be spent for such expenses shall be taken from the portion of the grant after the State makes grants to eligible entities. Section 675C (b) (1) Use of the Remainder-- the State shall use the remainder of the grant or allotment received for discretionary purposes.

Administrative Funds OCS sampled administrative costs and verified that the expenses were entered, approved and expended in the general ledger of record - the System ofAccounting and Reporting (SOARS). OCS determined that DHS followed procedures for the Administrative Cap as required by Section 675C(b)(2); and that the funds were used in accordance with Section 675(b) of the CSBG Act.

Discretionary Funds For the period under review DHS used discretionary funds to support the entities Sweat Equity program. The Sweat Equity program's purpose is to provide participants with low-income training in the areas of professional building maintenance, financial literacy, job readiness, and wrap around supports that address employment, financial stability and self-sufficiency. OCS verified that discretionary costs were properly supported with documentation, entered and expensed into SOARS. OCS determined that DHS followed procedures as required by Section 675C(b)(l) ofthe CSBG Act.

Monitoring

Section 678B (a) requires States to monitor local agencies to determine whether they meet performance goals, administrative standards, and financial management requirements, as well as other requirements of the State. The State shall conduct the following reviews of eligible entities: 1) full onsite review of each entity at least once during a 3-year period, 2) onsite review ofeach newly designated entity immediately after completion of the first year in which the entity received CSBG funds; 3) follow-up reviews to eligible entities that fail to meet the goals, standards, requirements established by the State, and 4) other reviews as appropriate, including reviews of entities with programs that have had other federal, State, or local grants terminated for cause.

DHS performs routine onsite monitoring on a quarterly basis with each eligible entity. The quarterly reports are used to produce a comprehensive year-end monitoring report. The report includes reviews of governance, administration and operations, human resources, and fiscal management.

OCS verified that DHS adhered to their documented policies and procedures for monitoring, and that DHS is in compliance with Section 678B(a)(2) of the CSBG Act.

- 6 ­

Training and Technical Assistance

Section 675C(b)(l)(A) allows States to use CSBG funds to provide training and technical assistance to those entities in need of such training and assistance. Section 678C(a)(3) indicates States shall offer training and technical assistance if appropriate to help correct eligible entities deficiencies.

OCS reviewed the DHS Monitoring Report of their eligible entity; there were no deficiencies that required T &TA. As noted, DHS used discretionary funds to support program activities at the eligible entity.

Corrective Action, Termination, and Reduction of Funding

Per Section 678C( a), "if the State determines, on the basis of a final decision, that an eligible entity fails to comply with the terms of an agreement, or the state plan, to provide services ...or to meet appropriate standards, goals, and other requirements established by the State, the State shall;

(1) inform the entity of the deficiency to be corrected; (2) require the entity to correct the deficiency; (3) (A) offer training and technical assistance, if appropriate to help correct the deficiency, and

prepare and submit to the Secretary a report describing the training and technical assistance offered;

(B) if the State determines that such training and technical assistance are not appropriate, prepare and submit to the Secretary a report stating the reasons for the determination; ..."

Section X of the DHS CSBG Manual sets forth procedures for corrective action, termination and reduction of funding. The procedures are implemented in the event the grantee failed to meet the terms of the grant agreement. The procedures comply with federal guidelines for corrective action. OCS noted that the DHS has procedures in place to address corrective action in accordance to section 678C of the CSBG Act.

FINANCIAL OPERATIONS

Fiscal Controls and Audits

Fiscal Controls

45 C.F.R. § 96.30(a) require States to maintain fiscal control and accounting procedures. Except where otherwise required by Federal law or regulation, a State shall obligate and expend block grant funds in accordance with the laws and procedures applicable to the obligation and expenditure of its own funds. Fiscal control and accounting procedures must be sufficient to; (a) permit preparation of reports required by the statute, and (b) permit the tracing of funds to a level of expenditure adequate to establish that such funds have not been used in violation of the restrictions and prohibitions of the statute authorizing the block grant.

OCS reviewed the general ledger of CSBG programmatic and administrative transactions provided by the District. OCS verified that CSBG funds were allowable, allocable and properly supported. CSBG transactions were reported through the District's System of Accounting and Reporting (SOAR) to a level ofexpenditure as required. OCS found that fiscal controls and accounting procedures were sufficient and in accordance with Federal regulations.

- 7 ­

Audits

According to 45 CFR §96.31 , grantees and sub grantees are responsible for obtaining audits in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, "Audits ofState, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations. " Agencies expending $500,000 or more ofFederal funds in any year must contract with an independent auditor to review their financial statements and Federal expenditures. Section 678D(a)(b) requires the State to establish fiscal control and fund accounting procedures necessary to assure the proper disbursal of and accounting for Federal funds paid to the State . .. including procedures for monitoring the funds provided under this subtitle. 45 CFR §96.31 requires that appropriate corrective action is taken within six months after receipt of the audit report in instances of noncompliance with Federal laws and regulations.

State Compliance (Single Audit)

OCS reviewed the A-133 single audits from FY 2012 and FY 2013 for the District. It was determined that DHS had no findings to report during the reporting periods, and was in compliance with OMB Circular A-133.

State Monitoring- Eligible Entity Compliance (Single Audit)

OCS determined that DHS has procedures in place for ensuring the eligible entity is compliant with Single audit guidelines. OCS confirmed that the eligible entity obtained their single audits for FY 2012 and FY 2013.

DHS procedures assure that appropriate corrective action is taken in a timely manner.

Recapture and Redistribution of Unobligated Funds

Section 675C(a)(3) a State may recapture and redistribute unobligated funds in excess of 20 percent of the amount distributed to an eligible entity to another eligible entity or to a private nonprofit organization. However, since 2001, Congressional Appropriation language has provided instruction that supersedes the language in the enabling legislation. Currently, States must comply with annual appropriation instructions requiring that, "to the extent Community Services Block Grant funds are distributed as grants by a State to eligible entities provided under the Act, and have not been expended by such entity, the funds shall remain with such entity for carryover into the next fiscal year for expenditure by such entity for program purposes.

DHS is in compliance with the current appropriations language.

State Carryover Requirements

DHS have carryover requirements located in their State CSBG procedural manual. The carryover requirement states "carryover funds that have not been expended shall remain with the CAA for carryover into the next fiscal year for expenditure. OCS determined that DHS has sufficient guidance and documentation in place to satisfy the requirement.

- 8 ­

Federal Financial Status Report

45 CFR §92.40, §92.41 , and §96.30(b)(4), respectively, the grantee shall submit annual program progress and Federal Financial Report (FFR) using OMB Standard Form 425. The FFRs are due within 90 days of the close of the applicable statutory grant periods. Failure to submit reports on time may be the basis for withholding financial assistance payments, suspension, or termination of funding.

OCS found that for the FY 2013 grant award period ( 1 0/1/2012 - 9/30/2014) the District submitted the FFRs in accordance with Federal regulations. Fiscal control and accounting procedures were in place to permit the preparation of the FFR.

PROGRAM OPERATIONS

Use of Ninety (90%) Percent of Funds

Section 672. The purpose and goals of the CSBG is to provide assistance to States and local communities working through a network ofcommunity action agencies and other neighborhood organizations, for the reduction ofpoverty, the revitalization oflow-income communities, and the empowerment of low-income families and individuals in rural and urban areas to become fully self­sufficient. Section 675. Require that not less than 90 percent of the funds made available to a State shall be used by the State to make grants for the purposes described in section 672 to eligible entities.

In accordance with Section 672 DHS allocated 90 percent ofCSBG funds expended serving low­income families and individuals within the District.

The following table below illustrates the actual amounts expended for each program area.

FY 2013 CSBG Use of Funds: District of Columbia

Programs Amount

Expended Program Goals for Low-Income Families and Individuals

Employment $2,396,206 Low-income participants who obtain employment and maintain employment, or become self-employed.

Education $2,588,523 Educational services provided for children and adults.

Housing $696,050 Housing services provided to improve living environment.

Emergency Service $909,168 Services provided for emergency services and crisis intervention.

Nutrition $742,522 Nutrition services provided to low-income individuals and families .

Health $401 ,085 Health care services made accessible to low-income families and individuals.

Self-Sufficiency $1 ,009,169 Services provided to assist low-income in gaining or increasing economic security.

- 9­

FY 2013 CSBG Use of Funds: District of Columbia

Programs Amount

Expended Program Goals for Low-Income Families and Individuals

Linkages $1 ,123,273

Activities that "Link" community members, groups, government, and commercial organizations that serve low-income communities.

Income Management $909,167 Income management services provide to low-income families and individuals.

Other $0 Total FY 2013 Expenditures $10,374,479 **Source: 2013 CSBG IS Survey Data

Tripartite Boards

Section 676B; require that members are chosen in accordance with democratic selection procedures to assure that not less than one-third of its members are representatives of low-income individuals and families who reside in the neighborhoods served. One-third of the members of the Board are elected public officials and the remaining members are official or members of business, industry, labor, religious, law enforcement, education, or other major groups interested in the community served. Members must actively participate in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the program that services their low-income communities.

OCS found that DHS had procedures in place to assure that the eligible entity comply with the statutory requirement for tripartite board. DHS monitoring report identified four board vacancies. OCS noted that DHS closely monitors and make recommendations to the eligible entity for filling the vacancies.

Results-Oriented Management and Accountability (ROMA) and Annual Reporting

Section 678E(l) and 678E(2). Each State that received funds shall participate in a performance measurement system and ensure that all eligible entities in the State participate to the extent to which programs are implemented in a manner that achieve positive results for the communities served. States may participate in the model evaluation system designed by OCS in consultation with the CSBG network called ROMA. Alternatively, States may design their own similar system.

The District participates in the ROMA system to measure performance and program outcomes. DHS uses the automated online reporting system - Community Action Statistical Access (CASA) for capturing its data collection for services performed for District ofColumbia residents. The eligible entity and their subgrantees are currently using the CASA system which is designed to produce outcome reports.

Annual Report

Section 678E (2). Require that each State shall annually prepare and submit to the Secretary a report on the measured performance of the State and the eligible entities in the State. In accordance with OCS Information Memoranda -133 the Annual Report must be submitted to OCS by March 31 , 2014 for FY 2013 activities. The report should describe how the State and the eligible entities met its goals and objectives, as well as provide information on the types ofprojects supported with FY

- 10­

2013 CSBG funds. The Annual Report must contain performance measurement outcome data which address the implementation of the national goals and measures.

DHS provided documentation supporting the data submitted to OCS. OCS reviewed the documentation and confirmed that DHS submitted their annual report within the established deadline of March 31st.

Limitation on Use of Funds

Section 678F. Grants may not be used by the State or by any other person with which the State makes arrangements ... for the purchase of improvement of land, or the purchase, construction, or permanent improvement (other than low-cost residential weatherization or other energy-related home repairs) of any building or other facility.

DHS received a waiver February 29, 2000 from OCS granting permission for use of CSBG funds, the waiver was based on extraordinary circumstances sufficient to justify the use ofCSBG funds for payment of construction loans (see detailed finding number 1 on page 3). With the exception of the failure to meet the waiver requirement to file a federal interest, which was corrected in FY 2015, DHS is in compliance with Section 678F.

Child Support Services

Section 678G(b ). During each fiscal year for which an eligible entity receives a grant such entity shall: (1) inform custodial parents in single-parent families that participate in programs, activities, or services ... about the availability of child support services; and (2) refer eligible parents to the child support offices ofState and local governments.

DHS CSBG Manual had procedures in place to inform custodial and single parents of the availability of child support services. OCS determined that DHS is in compliance with Section 678F of the CSBG Act.

- 11 ­

CONCLUSION

OCS would like to thank you, the staff, and the eligible entity visited for their cooperation and assistance during the State Assessment of the District of Columbia. This report is now considered final. Please provide your responses to the open recommendation contained in the report within 60 days after receipt of the final report.

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact:

Seth Hassett Director, Division of Community Assistance Telephone: (202) 401-4666 Fax: (202) 401-4694 Email: Seth.Hassett@acf.hhs.gov

Correspondence may be sent to:

Seth Hassett Director, DCA Administration for Children and Families Office of Community Services Division of Community Assistance 330 C Street, S.W., 5th Floor, Mailroom 5425 Washington D.C. 20201

- 12­

APPENDICES

- 13 ­

Appendix I AT-A-GLANCE: Eligible Entity Site Visit

United Planning Organization (UPO)

UPO, the designated community action agency for Washington, DC, was established December 10, 1962 to plan, coordinate, and implement human service programs for low-income residents. UPO continues to provide residents with valuable resources with the mission ofuniting people through the power of opportunity. The following services are provided:

• Housing Assistance- Provides comprehensive assistance to persons who want to rent, buy or already own a home, and who seek to be responsible renters, buyers and owners. This is accomplished through the following:

o Lead Safe program- identifies and controls lead-based paint hazards in eligible single and multi-family properties.

o Home Improvement and Weatherization services- provides energy efficient measures for qualified low-income District of Columbia residents.

o Foreclosure prevention- provides foreclosure prevention counseling free of charge to borrowers in distress.

o Rental Assistance • Job Training & Placement - Occupational training focused on entry to midlevel career

opportunities, skill and job-readiness training, job placement, and assistance services. This is offered through the following means:

o UPO Workforce Institute- offers educational and occupational training to eligible D.C. lower income residents, and to the general public under a published tuition rate.

o The Building Careers Academy- an all-inclusive facility that teaches students skills in the areas of construction and weatherization.

o Training and certification courses - State-certified training courses that prepare low­income D.C. residents with valuable workforce skills.

• Children, Youth and Family- Serving low-income individuals and families to help them progress towards the goal of self-sufficiency, through the means of securing viable employment, affordable housing, or receiving education.

- 14 ­

Report Contributors Appendix II

District of Columbia Staff:

Tunde Eboda, State CSBG Administrator Hayden Bernard, Agency Fiscal Officer Bromley Atterbury, Supervisory Accountant Sia Wonday, Accountant Gabriella Teh, Program Analyst Priscilla Burnett, Program Monitor

District of Columbia Eligible Entity:

United Planning Organization

OCS Staff:

David Barrie, Financial Operation, Branch Chief Isaac Davis, Lead Program Specialist Darlene Richardson, Auditor John Thompson, Auditor LaToya Smith, Records Management

- 15 ­